Benedict says police used 'surprising and deplorable methods' when they raided church offices, detained a group of bishops and drilled into tombs in a quest for evidence of sexual abuse.

Reporting from Rome — Pope Benedict XVI lashed out Sunday at Belgian authorities investigating allegations of clerical sexual abuse, accusing police of using "surprising and deplorable methods" when they raided church offices, detained a group of bishops for several hours and drilled into the tombs of two former cardinals in a quest for evidence.

The pope's statement also reaffirmed the Vatican's insistence on having a role in investigating abuses within the church, saying "such grave facts should be dealt with by civil and canonical authorities each respecting its own competence."

The raids in Belgium occurred last week and came in response to what prosecutors in Brussels described as a string of accusations of pedophilia within the Roman Catholic hierarchy in that country. The targets of the investigation included a former archbishop, Cardinal Godfried Danneels, whose home and former office were searched, and his personal computer confiscated.

Ok I'm probably going to be ripped for picking on the church again, but what I find deplorable is the continued actions of the church, in particular its head Pope Benedict XVI. How far do you have to stick your head in the sand to admit there's a problem. How heinous a crime does it have to be before they admit its a criminal problem and not a matter for an internal church investigation. The church has lost any semblence of credibility in being able to police its own. Sending pedofiles off to another church so they can repeat their actions is not policing their own. To top it off, as Archbishop of Munich the future pope was guilty of the same policies that he publically abhored in allowing the resignation of an Irish Archbishop. Hypocrite who doesn't understand that its more important to protect the children over the reputation of the church.

patteeu

06-28-2010, 08:32 PM

Ok I'm probably going to be ripped for picking on the church again, but what I find deplorable is the continued actions of the church, in particular its head Pope Benedict XVI. How far do you have to stick your head in the sand to admit there's a problem. How heinous a crime does it have to be before they admit its a criminal problem and not a matter for an internal church investigation. The church has lost any semblence of credibility in being able to police its own. Sending pedofiles off to another church so they can repeat their actions is not policing their own. To top it off, as Archbishop of Munich the future pope was guilty of the same policies that he publically abhored in allowing the resignation of an Irish Archbishop. Hypocrite who doesn't understand that its more important to protect the children over the reputation of the church.

You're building a strawman here. The Church doesn't take the position that civil authorities have no business investigating these alleged acts as crimes. They take the position that the state should do it's own work rather than bust down doors of retired clergymen to see what the church's investigations have uncovered. This kind of over-reach will tend to cause the Church to stick it's head in the sand in the same way that sunshine laws have caused high government officials in the US to eschew the use of efficient forms of communication like email.

The Church is in the business of saving souls, not acting as an arm of the state for the purpose of enforcing criminal laws.

irishjayhawk

06-29-2010, 03:29 AM

You're building a strawman here. The Church doesn't take the position that civil authorities have no business investigating these alleged acts as crimes. They take the position that the state should do it's own work rather than bust down doors of retired clergymen to see what the church's investigations have uncovered. This kind of over-reach will tend to cause the Church to stick it's head in the sand in the same way that sunshine laws have caused high government officials in the US to eschew the use of efficient forms of communication like email.

The Church is in the business of saving souls, not acting as an arm of the state for the purpose of enforcing criminal laws.

I didn't get this impression from reading the article. Can you quote the part which gives you this impression?

I'm not sure why they would raid graves either unless they had some information that things would be buried with them.

patteeu

06-29-2010, 06:57 AM

I didn't get this impression from reading the article. Can you quote the part which gives you this impression?

I'm not sure why they would raid graves either unless they had some information that things would be buried with them.

Here is the article:

Reporting from Rome — Pope Benedict XVI lashed out Sunday at Belgian authorities investigating allegations of clerical sexual abuse, accusing police of using "surprising and deplorable methods" when they raided church offices, detained a group of bishops for several hours and drilled into the tombs of two former cardinals in a quest for evidence.

The pope's statement also reaffirmed the Vatican's insistence on having a role in investigating abuses within the church, saying "such grave facts should be dealt with by civil and canonical authorities each respecting its own competence."

The raids in Belgium occurred last week and came in response to what prosecutors in Brussels described as a string of accusations of pedophilia within the Roman Catholic hierarchy in that country. The targets of the investigation included a former archbishop, Cardinal Godfried Danneels, whose home and former office were searched, and his personal computer confiscated.

Prosecutors did not say whether Danneels was suspected of abuse. They also confiscated the files of an arm's-length committee established by the Belgian church to hear allegations of abuse against priests.

The Vatican condemned what it said was a violation of the privacy of victims who had come forward to give evidence to the committee.

Police also searched the current archbishop's residence in Brussels, where the country's bishops had gathered for a regular meeting. The bishops' cellphones were taken away during the raid, prompting Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Vatican's secretary of State and No. 2 official, to label their nine-hour detention "unbelievable," saying such tactics exceeded those used by "communist regimes."

Church officials expressed particular indignation at what they called the violation of the tombs of two deceased archbishops. Prosecutors said they opened the graves to look for any incriminating documents. Msgr. Andre-Joseph Leonard, the current archbishop, likened the raid to fictional scenes in the "Da Vinci Code" novel.

The Belgian church has been caught in the deluge of sexual abuse scandals sweeping the Catholic Church in Europe. In April, Roger Vangheluwe, Belgium's longest-serving bishop, resigned after admitting he had sexually abused a boy for several years.

They weren't looking for forensic evidence from suspected abusers, they were looking for church documentation. They wanted to know what the church had determined from it's investigations, including those discoveries made in interviews with people who had an expectation of privacy and who otherwise might not have provided the information in the first place.

orange

06-29-2010, 11:24 AM

The Disgrace of Cardinal Danneels and the Belgian Catholic Church

This past week, Belgian police raided the headquarters of the Catholic Church in Belgian, as well as the home and office of recently retired Archbishop Godfried Danneels, during an investigation into the sexual abuse of children.

Rorate Caeli provides the full text of Pope Benedict’s letter to Abp. André Joseph Léonard, Archbishop of Mechlin-Brussels and President of the Belgian Episcopal Conference, responding to the unfortunate series of events:

I wish to express to you, dear Brother in the Episcopate, as well as to all Bishops of Belgium, my closeness and my solidarity in this moment of sadness, in which, with certain surprising and deplorable methods, searches were carried out in Mechlin Cathedral and in places where the Belgian Episcopate were assembled in plenary session. During that meeting, aspects related to the abuse of minors by members of the clergy were to have been treated, among other things. I have myself repeated numerous times that these grave facts should be treated by the civil order and by the canonical order in reciprocal respect for the specificity and autonomy of each one. In this sense, I wish that justice will follow its course, ensuring the rights of persons and institutions, in respect for victims, with the recognition, without prejudices, of those who wish to collaborate with it and with the refusal of everything that could darken the noble duties that are ascribed to it.
As Rorate Caeli notes, there is a “one-sideness” and “tone-deafness” to the papal remarks. The impression is exacerbated by Cardinal Secretary of State Tarcisio Bertone, who characterized the Belgian police’s raid as “a kidnapping, a grave and inconceivable fact”, having “no precedent even in communist regimes.”

However, a report from the Flemish De Standard (http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.standaard.be%2Fartikel%2Fdetail.aspx%3Fartikelid%3DEM2S46KM&sl=nl&tl=en) casts light on the investigation of the tombs. English translation via Google, so pardon the choppiness (HT again: Rorate Caeli):

“There are traces of tampering can be seen around the tomb of Cardinal Leo Suenens. Maybe that aroused the attention of police. Suenens was buried in 1996. The cardinal should nevertheless very prescient than to have hidden files. “

Local television to watch the officers walked inside the cathedral Thursday with crowbar and hammer drill. That fueled rumors that they broke open tombs in the crypt. The Vatican yesterday expressed outrage at the “desecration by the Belgian judicial authorities.”

“Well, desecration,” says the guide. ‘Investigators have two holes drilled in the wall that separates the two burial niches in the outside world. Behind it are a dozen boxes. Through those holes, they looked around with a camera, but found nothing. Can you call that sacrilege? Maybe they also want to break into boxes. But when you consider who it is, do you think twice[?]“

The Belgian church instituted its own commission to investigate charges of abuse, the Adriaenssens Commission. Is that not enough?

The problem was its connection with the Archdiocese, and the absence of either a lay component internally or a connection with the civil authorities. I always hoped that a truly independent commission would be formed, an organism whose objective was to help justice take its course. That must be the way. It’s not up to the church to decide who violated the law and who should be punished.

Do you believe that Belgium is a special case? Or is the plague of sexual abuse by clergy a common evil?

It happens everywhere, believe me. Belgium believed itself to be an exception because no case ever came to light. Yet as early as 1994, I had collected 82 accusations. The victims wanted to be heard by the church, they wanted to break the curse. It’s been useless, at least up to now.

You have said that you spoke with Cardinal Godfried Danneels, the former primate of the Belgian church, but he says he doesn’t remember.

I spoke with him about my files on two occasions, in the first half of the 1990s. I advised him of the problem, and I don’t know what he did afterwards. On one occasion, however, I remember that the cardinal became angry. He said this wasn’t my job and that I should stay out of it.

Do you think he said that to hide something?

The bishops have a long history over their shoulders of silence and omissions. They protect the guilty, and not the victims.

The conservative blog Brussels Journal has a must-read account by Alexandra Colen, homeschooling mother and Member of the Belgian Parliament for Antwerp, on Catholic life during the reign of Cardinal Danneels:

Since the revelation in April that Cardinal Danneels’s close friend and collaborator, Mgr Roger Vangheluwe, the Bishop of Bruges, had been a practicing pedophile throughout, and even before, his career as a bishop, victims have gained confidence that they will be taken seriously, and complaints have been pouring in, both to the courts and to the extra-judicial investigation committee of the archdiocese. The new archbishop Mgr. André-Joseph Léonard, has urged victims to take their case to the courts.

His predecessor, the liberal Cardinal Danneels, who was very popular with the press in Belgium and abroad, was Archbishop of Mechelen-Brussels and Primate of Belgium from 1979 until 2010. The sympathy for pedophile attitudes and arguments among the Belgian bishops during this period was no secret, especially since 1997 when the fierce controversy about the catechism textbook Roeach made the headlines. The editors of Roeach were Prof. Jef Bulckens of the Catholic University of Leuven and Prof. Frans Lefevre of the Seminary of Bruges. The textbook contained a drawing which showed a naked baby girl [which describes the genital stimulation of toddlers as "good fun"].

I told Cardinal Danneels that, although I was a member of Parliament for the Flemish-secessionist party Vlaams Blok, I was addressing him as a Catholic parent “who wishes to remain faithful to the papal authority and also wishes to educate her children this way.” I insisted that he forbid the use of this book in the catechism lessons: “This is why I insist – yes, the days of meekly asking are over – that you forbid the use of this ‘catechism book’ in our children’s classrooms.”

Today this case, that dates from 12 years ago, assumes a new and ominous significance. Especially now that I know that Mgr Roger Vangheluwe, the pedophile child molesting Bishop of Bruges, was the supervising bishop of both institutions – the Catholic University of Leuven and the Seminary of Bruges – whence came the editors in chief of this perverted “catechism” textbook.

Monsignor Vangheluwe not only entertained pedophile ideas, but also practiced them on his 11-year old nephew. Hundreds of children who were not raped physically were molested spiritually during the catechism lessons.

After I started my campaign against the Roeach textbook, many parents contacted me to voice their concerns. Stories of other practices in the Catholic education system poured in. There were schools where children were taught to put condoms over artificial penises and where they had to watch videos showing techniques of masturbation and copulation.

Because Cardinal Danneels refused to respond to requests to put an end to these practices, I and hundreds of concerned parents gathered in front of his palace on 15 October 1997. We carried placards with the text “Respect for parents and children,” and we said the rosary. Cardinal Danneels refused to receive a delegation of the demonstrators. “I shall not be pressured,” he said in the libertine magazine Humo on 21 October 1997. The Archbishop’s door remained closed …

Those expressing frustration over the impertinence of the Belgian police’s raid are encouraged to read the accounts of Alexandra Colen and Fr. Rik Devillè.

Finally, Michael Liccione (Sacramentum Vitae) asks the question:

Cardinal Danneels was, himself, enabled to enable the problems for three decades. What makes it so astonishing is that … the problems were public knowledge for much of that time. So how did he get away with it?
http://the-american-catholic.com/2010/06/27/the-disgrace-of-cardinal-danneels-and-the-belgian-catholic-church/

patteeu

06-29-2010, 11:47 AM

Alexandra Colen sounds like a loon. Maybe it's just the choppy translation.

orange

06-29-2010, 11:47 AM

Pope Rebukes Prominent Austrian Cardinal

By STACY MEICHTRY And JOHN W. MILLER

Pope Benedict XVI sought to quell discord within church ranks Monday, publicly scolding a prominent cardinal who criticized the Vatican's handling of sex-abuse cases under Pope John Paul II.

In a statement, the Vatican said Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn, archbishop of Vienna, met with the pope in the Vatican to "clarify" critical remarks he recently made about Cardinal Angelo Sodano, the dean of the College of Cardinals and the Vatican's former No. 2 official.

In April, Cardinal Schoenborn told Austrian media that, during the 1990s, Cardinal Sodano blocked attempts by then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the future pope, to spur a Vatican investigation into sex-abuse allegations against a top church official in Austria.

Cardinal Schoenborn also had called Cardinal Sodano to task for referring to the sex-abuse scandal as "petty gossip" in a recent Easter Sunday address to the pope in St. Peter's Square.

"Leveling accusations at a cardinal is a competency that lies soley with the pope," the Vatican said in a statement. Cardinal Schoenborn "expressed regret" to Cardinal Sodano for the way his comments were interpreted by the media, the Vatican said. The statement didn't say how Cardinal Schoenborn clarified the meaning of his statements.

Meanwhile, members of a truth commission on sex crimes set up by the Belgian Catholic church resigned Monday after police seized their files last week. Raids by Belgian police on church property set off a diplomatic storm, with Pope Benedict XVI lashing out at Belgian authorities over the weekend.

The dozen or so members of the commission "don't want to be competing with the law," said Eric de Beukelaer, a spokesman for the Belgian bishops. "We have confidence in the work of the justice system."

Peter Adriaenssens, the child psychologist chairing the commission, was called as a witness by prosecutors on Monday afternoon.

Belgium has no law mandating that church authorities report crimes by clergy.

Alexandra Colen sounds like a loon. Maybe it's just the choppy translation.

Because she objects to "the genital stimulation of toddlers as "good fun"?"

irishjayhawk

06-29-2010, 02:59 PM

Here is the article:

They weren't looking for forensic evidence from suspected abusers, they were looking for church documentation. They wanted to know what the church had determined from it's investigations, including those discoveries made in interviews with people who had an expectation of privacy and who otherwise might not have provided the information in the first place.

It looks like what you said was accurate but to the point of the underlined:

What other organization can say they're investigating the sexual abuse of minors internally and ask the cops not interfere?

I can't think of one.

patteeu

06-29-2010, 04:56 PM

Pope Rebukes Prominent Austrian Cardinal

By STACY MEICHTRY And JOHN W. MILLER

Pope Benedict XVI sought to quell discord within church ranks Monday, publicly scolding a prominent cardinal who criticized the Vatican's handling of sex-abuse cases under Pope John Paul II.

In a statement, the Vatican said Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn, archbishop of Vienna, met with the pope in the Vatican to "clarify" critical remarks he recently made about Cardinal Angelo Sodano, the dean of the College of Cardinals and the Vatican's former No. 2 official.

In April, Cardinal Schoenborn told Austrian media that, during the 1990s, Cardinal Sodano blocked attempts by then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the future pope, to spur a Vatican investigation into sex-abuse allegations against a top church official in Austria.

Cardinal Schoenborn also had called Cardinal Sodano to task for referring to the sex-abuse scandal as "petty gossip" in a recent Easter Sunday address to the pope in St. Peter's Square.

"Leveling accusations at a cardinal is a competency that lies soley with the pope," the Vatican said in a statement. Cardinal Schoenborn "expressed regret" to Cardinal Sodano for the way his comments were interpreted by the media, the Vatican said. The statement didn't say how Cardinal Schoenborn clarified the meaning of his statements.

Meanwhile, members of a truth commission on sex crimes set up by the Belgian Catholic church resigned Monday after police seized their files last week. Raids by Belgian police on church property set off a diplomatic storm, with Pope Benedict XVI lashing out at Belgian authorities over the weekend.

The dozen or so members of the commission "don't want to be competing with the law," said Eric de Beukelaer, a spokesman for the Belgian bishops. "We have confidence in the work of the justice system."

Peter Adriaenssens, the child psychologist chairing the commission, was called as a witness by prosecutors on Monday afternoon.

Belgium has no law mandating that church authorities report crimes by clergy.

Just as I predicted, these raids have encouraged the Church to take an "it's not in our interest to find out what happened" attitude, at least in that locale. Great job, Belgium.

patteeu

06-29-2010, 04:57 PM

Because she objects to "the genital stimulation of toddlers as "good fun"?"

Because her story sounds preposterous enough that I can't possibly believe it without seeing actual supporting evidence.

patteeu

06-29-2010, 04:58 PM

It looks like what you said was accurate but to the point of the underlined:

What other organization can say they're investigating the sexual abuse of minors internally and ask the cops not interfere?

I can't think of one.

Lawyers. Psychiatrists.

orange

06-29-2010, 05:54 PM

Because her story sounds preposterous enough that I can't possibly believe it without seeing actual supporting evidence.

Straight from The Brussels Journal (The Voice of Conservatism in Europe):

His predecessor, the liberal Cardinal Danneels, who was very popular with the press in Belgium and abroad, was Archbishop of Mechelen-Brussels and Primate of Belgium from 1979 until 2010. The sympathy for pedophile attitudes and arguments among the Belgian bishops during this period was no secret, especially since 1997 when the fierce controversy about the catechism textbook Roeach made the headlines. The editors of Roeach were Prof. Jef Bulckens of the Catholic University of Leuven and Prof. Frans Lefevre of the Seminary of Bruges. The textbook contained a drawing which showed a naked baby girl saying: “Stroking my pussy makes me feel groovy,” “I like to take my knickers off with friends,” “I want to be in the room when mum and dad have sex.” The drawing also shows a naked little boy and girl that are “playing doctor” and the little boy says: “Look, my willy is big.”

The drawing also showed three pairs of parents. Those with the “correct” attitude reply: “Yes, feeling and stroking those little places is good fun.” This “catechism textbook” was used in the catechism lessons in the catholic schools, until one day I discovered it among the schoolbooks of my eldest daughter, then 13 years old. On 3 September 1997 I wrote a letter to Cardinal Danneels, saying:

“When I see this drawing and its message, I get the distinct impression that this catechism textbook is designed intentionally to make 13 and 14 year olds believe that toddlers enjoy genital stimulation. In this way one breeds pedophiles that sincerely believe that children actually think that what they are doing to them is ‘groovy’, while the opposite is the case.”

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/4471

Now, far be it from ME to suggest that a Conservative website would post lies - especially when they're so easily checked out.

p.s. I wonder what the fourth blurb says. It must not be controversial.
p.p.s GOOGLE comes up with "I feel blessed pee"

patteeu

06-29-2010, 06:00 PM

Straight from The Brussels Journal (The Voice of Conservatism in Europe):

His predecessor, the liberal Cardinal Danneels, who was very popular with the press in Belgium and abroad, was Archbishop of Mechelen-Brussels and Primate of Belgium from 1979 until 2010. The sympathy for pedophile attitudes and arguments among the Belgian bishops during this period was no secret, especially since 1997 when the fierce controversy about the catechism textbook Roeach made the headlines. The editors of Roeach were Prof. Jef Bulckens of the Catholic University of Leuven and Prof. Frans Lefevre of the Seminary of Bruges. The textbook contained a drawing which showed a naked baby girl saying: “Stroking my pussy makes me feel groovy,” “I like to take my knickers off with friends,” “I want to be in the room when mum and dad have sex.” The drawing also shows a naked little boy and girl that are “playing doctor” and the little boy says: “Look, my willy is big.”

The drawing also showed three pairs of parents. Those with the “correct” attitude reply: “Yes, feeling and stroking those little places is good fun.” This “catechism textbook” was used in the catechism lessons in the catholic schools, until one day I discovered it among the schoolbooks of my eldest daughter, then 13 years old. On 3 September 1997 I wrote a letter to Cardinal Danneels, saying:

“When I see this drawing and its message, I get the distinct impression that this catechism textbook is designed intentionally to make 13 and 14 year olds believe that toddlers enjoy genital stimulation. In this way one breeds pedophiles that sincerely believe that children actually think that what they are doing to them is ‘groovy’, while the opposite is the case.”

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/4471

Now, far be it from ME to suggest that a Conservative website would post lies - especially when they're so easily checked out.

The lie appears to be the implication that this was a textbook teaching pedophilia when what it really seems to be is a lesson about dealing with youngsters who are discovering their own sexual parts.

I suppose you'd be happier if people were being taught to scold kids for these discoveries and make them feel dirty/bad for this natural curiosity.

Thanks for posting this and confirming my suspicion about Colen.

orange

06-29-2010, 06:22 PM

Just as I predicted, these raids have encouraged the Church to take an "it's not in our interest to find out what happened" attitude, at least in that locale. Great job, Belgium.

That is great. Now the authorities will be able to operate directly without the pretense that the Church is cooperating.

patteeu

06-29-2010, 06:37 PM

That is great. Now the authorities will be able to operate directly without the pretense that the Church is cooperating.

Let any future victims be damned, huh?

orange

06-29-2010, 06:44 PM

I think a few Bishops and Priests in jail and a couple billion dollars in fines/judgements will have a lasting impact on the number of future victims.

Much more than a bunch of quiet retirements or reassignments.

VAChief

06-29-2010, 06:45 PM

Lawyers. Psychiatrists.

Actually professional ethics for a mental health professional would require them to notify the authorities of a known abusive situation. It is not protected by client confidentiality.

patteeu

06-29-2010, 07:07 PM

Actually professional ethics for a mental health professional would require them to notify the authorities of a known abusive situation. It is not protected by client confidentiality.

These are victim accounts of past situations, not ongoing or future crime. In most cases, I'm sure the victim is already an adult.

These types of privileges differ from one jurisdiction to another, but in general the privilege exists as long as it isn't outweighed by the need/interest of the state. In these cases, it's hard for me to believe such a need exists given the fact that we're talking about events long past, perpetrated by people who in many cases are already dead, on victims who are adults and who presumably don't want to go public.

VAChief

06-29-2010, 07:17 PM

These are victim accounts of past situations, not ongoing or future crime. In most cases, I'm sure the victim is already an adult.

These types of privileges differ from one jurisdiction to another, but in general the privilege exists as long as it isn't outweighed by the need/interest of the state. In these cases, it's hard for me to believe such a need exists given the fact that we're talking about events long past, perpetrated by people who in many cases are already dead, on victims who are adults and who presumably don't want to go public.

You mentioned psychiatrists, I was just clarifying that they are ethically required to divulge any accounts of abuse.

patteeu

06-29-2010, 07:23 PM

You mentioned psychiatrists, I was just clarifying that they are ethically required to divulge any accounts of abuse.

Are you saying that a psychiatrist has to report every instance of abuse an adult patient relates no matter how many years have passed? That's hard to believe, and if true it must put a real damper on honest interaction between doctor and patient.

In any event, I was asked what organizations could get away with refusing to divulge info to authorities and while the doctor-patient privilege isn't as strong as that of lawyer-client, it does exist. The ethical considerations of the profession are the opposite side of the issue.

VAChief

06-29-2010, 07:30 PM

Are you saying that a psychiatrist has to report every instance of abuse an adult patient relates no matter how many years have passed? That's hard to believe, and if true it must put a real damper on honest interaction between doctor and patient.

It doesn't put a damper on it if they are honest up front. You always tell a client what your limitations of confidentiality are going in. There shouldn't be any surprises. In regards to your question, it isn't up to a mental health professional to decide guilt or innocence. They should report abuse, past or present. Obviously if they are dead nothing will come of it, but if they are alive the potential for other victims cannot be taken lightly. Pedophiles are rarely if ever one and done perpetrators.

patteeu

06-29-2010, 07:44 PM

It doesn't put a damper on it if they are honest up front. You always tell a client what your limitations of confidentiality are going in. There shouldn't be any surprises. In regards to your question, it isn't up to a mental health professional to decide guilt or innocence. They should report abuse, past or present. Obviously if they are dead nothing will come of it, but if they are alive the potential for other victims cannot be taken lightly. Pedophiles are rarely if ever one and done perpetrators.

There might actually be less of a damper effect if doctors didn't disclose, up front, what the limits to their confidentiality were. As it is, it's hard to know how many things go undisclosed because the patient can't trust the doctor to keep their secrets.

VAChief

06-29-2010, 07:53 PM

There might actually be less of a damper effect if doctors didn't disclose, up front, what the limits to their confidentiality were. As it is, it's hard to know how many things go undisclosed because the patient can't trust the doctor to keep their secrets.

Some wait to disclose until something is disclosed that they have to report. It is better to be up front however. Clients will disclose regardless if sufficient trust and rapport is formed. If that trust is not there the client isn't going to divulge regardless of what or when the confidentiality limits are disclosed.

Garcia Bronco

06-29-2010, 08:11 PM

For the love of Saint Peter, get these people in jail where they belong.

irishjayhawk

06-29-2010, 08:13 PM

Lawyers. Psychiatrists.

ROFL

I'm almost thinking this is a TIC/Devils Advocate post. That's how asinine it is as an answer to my question.

patteeu

06-29-2010, 09:12 PM

ROFL

I'm almost thinking this is a TIC/Devils Advocate post. That's how asinine it is as an answer to my question.

Why? Did I misunderstand your question?

irishjayhawk

06-30-2010, 01:17 PM

Why? Did I misunderstand your question?

I thought my question was worded appropriately but here it is another way:

You think Lawyers and Psychiatrists perform internal investigations on people in their firms who are suspected of child molestation/rape and those investigations ask police not to interfere?

patteeu

06-30-2010, 02:13 PM

I thought my question was worded appropriately but here it is another way:

You think Lawyers and Psychiatrists perform internal investigations on people in their firms who are suspected of child molestation/rape and those investigations ask police not to interfere?

Oh, I see. It was a much narrower question than I realized. I still think the law firm answer gets us pretty close, but a couple of even better ones would be foreign diplomats or a foreign military organization.

irishjayhawk

06-30-2010, 03:12 PM

Oh, I see. It was a much narrower question than I realized. I still think the law firm answer gets us pretty close, but a couple of even better ones would be foreign diplomats or a foreign military organization.

Well, there's the problem: The Vatican shouldn't have any of that status. Foreign state, my ass.

That said, none of those should be exempt.

Do you think authorities have acted out of place in this investigation?

patteeu

06-30-2010, 03:37 PM

Well, there's the problem: The Vatican shouldn't have any of that status. Foreign state, my ass.

That said, none of those should be exempt.

Do you think authorities have acted out of place in this investigation?

That doesn't seem like a problem to me. At least we agree that the type of treatment the Church is looking for is far from unique.

irishjayhawk

06-30-2010, 05:22 PM

That doesn't seem like a problem to me. At least we agree that the type of treatment the Church is looking for is far from unique.

Can you name an instance in either of the examples you provided?

And how is their status not a problem?

patteeu

06-30-2010, 05:48 PM

Can you name an instance in either of the examples you provided?

And how is their status not a problem?

An instance of what? I can't think of a time when police raided a foreign military base if that's what you mean, but there are lots of examples when they didn't (even if they're hard to notice). Most of the time a government wouldn't even contemplate such an action.

irishjayhawk

06-30-2010, 05:54 PM

An instance of what? I can't think of a time when police raided a foreign military base if that's what you mean, but there are lots of examples when they didn't (even if they're hard to notice). Most of the time a government wouldn't even contemplate such an action.

So your emphasis in the matter is on the foreign part, in that the Vatican is a sovereign state and therefore their churches are embassies?

patteeu

06-30-2010, 06:29 PM

So your emphasis in the matter is on the foreign part, in that the Vatican is a sovereign state and therefore their churches are embassies?

Meh. The foreign examples are just the most obvious. I think there's also a lot of merit to the privilege analogy with attorneys so it's some of both.

Shouldn't you be attracted to a separation of church and state perspective?

irishjayhawk

06-30-2010, 08:54 PM

Meh. The foreign examples are just the most obvious. I think there's also a lot of merit to the privilege analogy with attorneys so it's some of both.

Shouldn't you be attracted to a separation of church and state perspective?

I'm starting to think we're talking past each other.

How is what I'm saying in any way prompting a pro-church and state perspective?

patteeu

06-30-2010, 11:35 PM

I'm starting to think we're talking past each other.

How is what I'm saying in any way prompting a pro-church and state perspective?

Nevermind, I realized why I was mistaken on that. You've never given me any reason to believe you have any objection to the state interfering with the church even if you don't seem to want the church involved in state matters.

irishjayhawk

07-01-2010, 03:32 AM

Nevermind, I realized why I was mistaken on that. You've never given me any reason to believe you have any objection to the state interfering with the church even if you don't seem to want the church involved in state matters.

In matters of offenses like murder or rape/child molestation, I see no reason why not.

Otherwise, I don't see much meddling with church affairs. Well, unless you count my belief churches should be property taxed.

The Mad Crapper

07-01-2010, 06:40 AM

Moonbat speak:

In matters of offenses like murder or rape/child molestation, I see no reason why not.

Normal person translation:

Criminal priests have no rights, sovereign or otherwise , UN troops who rape children have complete immunity.

So do black panthers who menace voters with weapons outside of voting stations.